Hi Jeremy, Great news to hear you've beaten your illness.
Interesting thoughts on osgWidget, not one I was expecting from you, but I can see the logic behind it. osgQt does require Qt which isn't a small dependency so for a lightweight users interface osgWidget still has value. Before we could fully replace osgWidget with osgQt we'd need to address performance and threading issues that Qt introduces. When you say osgWidget should have been far small and more generic could you explain what you have in mind for a what osgWidget should have been? Robert. On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Jeremy Moles <jer...@emperorlinux.com> wrote: > As more work goes into osgQt towards OSG3 (and as we get closer to > having full, fist class 2D widgets), I think that osgWidget (in it's > current form) should be removed. It was designed with the very futile > goal of trying to be a 2D UI kit, when it should have been far smaller > and far more generic from the very beginning. > > I have been working on--in-between paid OSG work and medical > maintenance--this newer version, but it is not ready for anyone to look > at. > > And also: I was officially declared "in remission" about a month ago, so > my short (but interesting!) bout with blood cancer at 29 is over. > Yay. :) > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
